1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

[R&F] Should be England be "Un-Nerfed"?

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Trav'ling Canuck, Mar 8, 2018.

?

Should England receive a free melee unit after conquering a city not on it's home continent?

  1. No, the March 2018 patch got it right. Free melee unit on city settle only.

    31 vote(s)
    18.3%
  2. Yes, but only once per city, so no "free city farming"

    122 vote(s)
    72.2%
  3. Yes, every time the conquer a city, just like it was before the March 2018 patch

    16 vote(s)
    9.5%
  1. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam GiftOfNukes

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    23,037
    Location:
    Orlando
    Possibly, though Scotland isn't very good either. Maybe he just wanted to make sure England was even worse :p.

    It's probably best to consider civs as a whole, as some civs are carried by only one or two of their unique aspects while others distribute what makes them useful more evenly. Pax B was an important part of England's strength, in contrast to say America's vanilla UU which you could remove from the game and leave America nearly unaffected :/. Mustang is a little better, but not much. Mongolia losing Keshig wouldn't be unplayable, but it would be a big hit.

    I don't buy the alleged "snowballing" as a problem. Too inconsistent with reality and with how civs with early bonuses function in practice to support this notion.
     
    Trav'ling Canuck likes this.
  2. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    842
    Gender:
    Male
    People like things that get them "stuff", regardless of whether the stuff speeds up or slows down victory. Which is fine, because if people like building a bunch of stuff, then I'm glad the game includes a wonder like the Ruhr Valley that let's them do so. I recall one comment was that if you don't build it, the AI will, which implies a confidence in the AI's ability to make good use of that production that I wish I shared.

    I think the development team can get caught in that, too. How else to explain the current Tier 3 buildings? Other than for the tech/civic boosts, under what circumstances would building the Tier 3 building be better than running a project for that district? Perhaps there is one and I misunderstand the math, but it just seems like running projects is the quickest way to victory, and building "stuff" like Tier 3 buildings just slows you down. Mind, the Ruhr Valley lets you finish district projects faster, too, so it does have that benefit if you have a Great Engineer itching to build a Wonder for you.
     
    acluewithout and Archon_Wing like this.
  3. TheMeInTeam

    TheMeInTeam GiftOfNukes

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    23,037
    Location:
    Orlando
    Nice thing about AI building it is that you keep the production used to produce military units in addition to the AI's production used to build Ruhr Valley. Though having it placed nicely as a player would is rare.
     
  4. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,154
    Gender:
    Male
    Yea, but funny enough it got nerfed lol.

    But indeed. People say a lot of things, such as warmunger penalty being impossible to deal with as if nothing changed since Vanilla. It's what happens when people rely on outdated info from people that were making up crap anyways.
     
  5. UWHabs

    UWHabs Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2008
    Messages:
    3,177
    Location:
    Toronto
    The big problem is that production costs late are just too high. So even a wonder like Ruhr, if you say that you work an average of 6 mines, and are getting about 100 hammers per turn in it, it's worth about 25 production per turn. At its cost, it still takes you 58 turns to break even at that point. Or a research lab, even with the best policies is only worth 10 science per turn. At a cost of 525 hammers, it's going to take you a long time to have it pay off. And at that point in the game, building something that takes you 50 turns to pay off just doesn't make sense. You're almost better to build a new settler, campus, and library for a similar cost.
     
    Uberfrog likes this.
  6. GT_OKEZ

    GT_OKEZ Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2007
    Messages:
    294
    Well yes, she is a late game Civ. If you can manage to get there then Vicky is powerful and that's how I play her. Chill cultural victory game ftw :p. Same with America. You are right, the very early game is not as easy with Vicky compared to most others but its not impossible and I don't think extremely difficult either. Going for other victory types is definitely harder as she wasn't designed for it.

    You said to name some Civs worse than Vicky so here it goes:
    Georgia (obviously)
    Spain
    Norway
     
  7. Trav'ling Canuck

    Trav'ling Canuck Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2018
    Messages:
    842
    Gender:
    Male
    Norway's not that bad post R&F.

    Spain and England seem about on par to me.

    Tamar's just lucky to be in the game, I guess :)
     
  8. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Canada
    I can only theorise for higher difficulty single player, but it seems early Caravels after a quick Cartography Eureka might be a good play since Dockyards are cheaper - if there are no continents close by.

    It should be a matter of plugging in her agenda to be friendly on the same continent while aggressively expanding elsewhere.
     
  9. liv

    liv Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,187
    Well aggressively expanding with caravels are not always possible and with loyalty as it is probably impossible one needs a land army to create a good loyalty triangle. If you expand through war you get no freebies. Building a harbour in a city you captured gived nothing. And expanding by settling is hard on higher levels. They are a drag with abilities impossible to use.
     
  10. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Canada
    Ok. The Dockyard should help with loyalty though, but to delay it until Military science sounds best for the unique unit. In any case a free melee unit should be helpful and the gold income can let you buy more units. I would think that there are lots of spots where settling directly on the coast is the only way to get decent housing, making them good pickings on other continents.
     
  11. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,622
    The stupid thing about dockyard loyalty is you settle your city off continent and it is then... well before you build your dockyard that you get loyalty issues.
     
  12. acluewithout

    acluewithout Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    718
    Thanks @Victoria @Archon_Wing @Trav'ling Canuck and others. That has helped clarify my thinking a lot.

    On power levels, I love reading people's posts on tier levels etc. because you learn so much, but I'm deeply suspicious about whether they are that meaningful other than for Civs at the extreme ends (although I thought Lilly's recent attempt was the most credible so far). But, without really getting into rankings, both Norway and Spain are quite good. Certainly better than England. Spain in particular has really benefitted from R&F (although again, the way they've tackled loyalty for Spain seems super lame and tacked on).
     
    Victoria likes this.
  13. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Canada
    It might be more useful to capture a city with a pre-built harbor, that way it gets converted into the Dockyard when loyalty is a problem.
     
    Trav'ling Canuck likes this.
  14. Archon_Wing

    Archon_Wing Vote for me or die

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,154
    Gender:
    Male


    Though this is pretty rare and also completely unnecessary, but hey.
     
  15. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,622
    Sure, you get no pax benefit but yes +4, As @Archon_Wing hints, its not really necessary.
    The whole thing about England now is you need to settle to get your Pax
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018 at 9:32 AM
  16. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Canada
    Better timing to do a raid like that might be right when redcoats become available so you can bring some along or rush buy in the new city. Are you saying AIs on other continents rarely build harbours? I'm thinking also it doesn't matter in the wake of your excessive forces.
     
  17. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,622
    They are not excessive, more about right unless you are lagging behind. One stirling falls which is not too far away all is well in the world of loyalty without harbours.
    The thing is naval attacks are just too easy unless they have not settled near the coast or sometimes if not visible.
    I was playing the Zulu yesterday/today and was impressed when my navy started turning into fleets and Amadas by itself
     
  18. Scaramanga

    Scaramanga Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Messages:
    1,716
    Location:
    Canada
    Yeah, I'm agreeing that the extra loyalty is not needed because of all the force brought, which is appropriate to the age. But if the attack was done earlier with redcoats and frigates it could maybe have been completed earlier with less forces.
    I'm seeing the new England as something that has to use more diplomatic finesse, but then winning the game with less angry faces as possible is just my own little challenge.
     
  19. acluewithout

    acluewithout Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    718
    England currently gets its most substantial bonuses - loyalty and melee units - precisely just after when they would be useful.

    England are also just much less flexible than they were before. It’s not really about England being “nerfed”. It’s more that various strategies - which were really fun - aren’t available any more. Added to that, there were so many great ways that England could have interacted with the new mechanics, but the narrow focus they now have means none of that is possible.
     
  20. Victoria

    Victoria Regina Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,622
    Yup, I avoid playing OP civs and its sort of sad you had to play England to realise Pax was quite situational and moar troops is not how you win a game. Now when you play England its just crap... sure you can sail on the waves and think hey, they are OK.... then you sail on the waves as Norway, France, Zulu, America, Japan, Netherlands, Indonesia, Brazil, Scythia and realise she's not good at that either in comparison... Zulu shps.. I only just realized how good they are... Amabutho is not just on land despite what a Wiki may say, accidental or not.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018 at 12:45 PM
    acluewithout likes this.

Share This Page